Lack of diversification among employee stock owners: An empirical evaluation of behavioral explanations

Andrew Pendleton,Andrew Robinson

doi:10.1002/hrm.21892

Andrew Pendleton, Andrew Robinson

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21892

Copy DOI

Abstract

The article considers the reasons for employees holding large proportions of their financial savings and investments in company stock, drawing on explanations proposed in the behavioral finance literature. Utilizing data from a survey of employees participating in the United Kingdom Save as You Earn stock options and savings scheme, it is found that substantial proportions of stock owners hold sizeable concentrations of employer stock. Several explanations for this risky behavior are tested, with familiarity, reciprocity, and inertia found to be associated with portfolio concentration. Organizational commitment and “naïve extrapolation” from recent stock prices are not. The implications for theory and practice are considered.

Highlights

Quasars constitute the most luminous types of active galactic nuclei (AGNs), where a supermassive black hole (SMBH) is powered by significant mass accretion through a thin accretion disk
We briefly review the dependencies of the RLF on black hole mass, luminosity, and accretion rate for our sample
We find that the RLF for unobscured quasars shows a clear dependence on MBH, with the most massive black holes having the highest fraction of radio loud (RL) quasars, consistent with previous work (Laor 2000; Lacy et al 2001; Dunlop et al 2003; Kratzer & Richards 2015)

Summary

Introduction

Quasars constitute the most luminous types of active galactic nuclei (AGNs), where a supermassive black hole (SMBH) is powered by significant mass accretion through a thin accretion disk. Only about 10% of all quasars are radio loud (RL), i.e., have relativistic jets with a high bulk Lorentz factor, G ~ 10. The majority have much weaker core radio emission and are termed radio quiet (RQ). This distinction into radio-to-optical flux is not sharp, but there are clearly two populations (e.g., Kellermann et al 1989; Ivezić et al 2002; Baloković et al 2012). The viewing angle with respect to the jet will change the observed intensity due to relativistic beaming (Scheuer & Readhead 1979), but it is clear that inclination unifies different classes of RL AGN rather than explaining the difference between RL and RQ (e.g., Urry & Padovani 1995)

Objectives

Results

Discussion

Conclusion